The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1887-02-04

-ment Of two Of the three judges Of that
Court, in conflict with . provision Of
the State Constitution. There cannot
be found Ia the Constitution Of Oregon
any warrant whatever fer such a pro-
eesding. There cannot be found In that
Constitution any provision by which
the Judges OF The several Courts ef
Oregon are exempted from obedience
70 the laws Of the State. There cannot
bs found there any warrant BY which
they can auapend,by 40 ordsr,the oper-
atiou Of Law which that Constitntion
expressly declares shalt never be sns-
pended but By the Legislative Assem-
bly,. BY that Instrument they are
bouad 10 obey and enforce tho law, ,And
are not privileged to disregard and
nullify the Law. Ia that instrument
there Is no provision by which the unan-
imous viii Of the people In regard to
this registry Law, regularly expressed
Ia legislative enactment. can be thwart-
cd by any two or three men in the
State. Judges cannot make or nnmake
laws, but. like others, thay must obsy
laws. But il is claimed that that pro-
vision Of tho statutey relating 10 the
registration Of soteia was not Law, II
having heen held by the Court a. being
void because II wss 10 conflict, as tho
Court deemed, with = Constitutional
provision. If this claim be correct
then the duly enacted statutes Of tho
State may not all be the laws Of The
State. II this claim be correct tho pso-
pie Of the State are in ign6ranss as to
the laws to which they must render
obedience until they have passAd The
scrutiny Of The Saprems Conrt and re-
ceived is sanction. THERE'S no var
rant whatever for any such claim 10 The
Constitution Of Oregon. saeh doc
trins Il the doctrine Of the Courts, and
not The doctrine Of tho Constitution. A
statute Of the Legislative Assembly of
Oregon. duly enacted, Is Law Of the
Safe until Il is repealed by the Lsgis-
IAtnre. It's operation can be ID more
saspsnded b. decision Of the Court
than /. can by an order iron the Ex-
eculiYe. There can DO no mistake
whatsver abou. this proposition. The
Consultation expressly declares that
'every statute shall be public law
unless otherwise declared Ia the statute
itself" TART. 1, Sec. 81, and therefore
this registration act was "pnblic law"
deolsred 70 be such BY the Constitution.
notwithstanding the Supreme Court de.
ciared II TO be not lAw. The State
government Of 0rcgoa II composed Of
three separate depArtments-the legis-
latiye, the executive add the judicial.
Each Is Independent Ia It's sphere, aud
the action Of each operating within
such sphere Is binding upon tho others
The judicial branch can no more nnlllfy
Law of the LsgislaIars by decision,
under our State Constitusion, than can
the Legislative branch nuliify decision
Of The Court by a legislative enactment,
or than can the Governor set aside both
the decisions OF the Courta and che
statutes Of The Legislature by an execu.
tive Older. But tho Courts have adj
vaneed the theory that il 10 their prov
ince, In case they are OF the opinion
that the Legislature has erred ia regard
to Constitutional question, to nullify
the Legislative act b. judicial deci-
sion. This doctrine has no foundation
whatever ia the Constitution, il has no
foundation in the common law,it has no
foundation in reason, (for the common
Law ia ''the perfection of reason," and
1t has no other foundation than tha
dictnm Of the Courts themselves. II
the Courts possess the po wer to nullify
law of the Legislature by Judicial
order, then the Legislative and the Ju-
dIcial branches ara not coordinate
branches the legislative branch ID
subordinate to the judicial. Such q
doctrine "were to set the judicial power
above that of the legislative, which
would Be subvsrsive Of oil government. /"
| Il Blaekstons, 9l.) If the Courts, a,
claimed by them, possess the power to
declare an act Of the Legislature void,
then no enactment Of the Legislature
can be law without The ultimate con.
sent Of the Courts. IL this doctrine be
correct, II we are finally TO look to the
Courts and not to1the Legislature for
the law, the Legislaturs necessarily be-
comes 40 useless appendage Of goyern-
ment. We might as we'll At once dis
pense with Il and let the Courss at 6rss
declare the Law. It would be produ Q
tive OF much less confusion. And il
there be no Legislature there need b
no Executive. The officers Of the CourI
could enfore the Law Of tho Court. Their
We would have 10 name what We nov
have in truth, il this doctrine Of th'
Courts be the correct doctrine, not